Though it is easy to get distracted by the Presidential election, we should all educate ourselves on the other issues on the ballot. I would like to highlight four of the twelve propositions because the City Council will be taking a position on them on Tuesday. According to the Council Agenda:
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 08-____formalizing the City’s viewpoint on Measures before voters on the …opposition of Proposition 5 Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act of 2008 and 7 Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008, and support for Proposition 9 Victim’s Bill of Rights Act of 2008 and Proposition 11 Redistricting, Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
I have a problem with these positions and I believe the City and the Voters should look more closely at what these propositions say and do. Why these four were selected by the City to take a position on is something I’d like to have the answer for, but will probably have to wait until Tuesday.
Source of some material is from the SF Bay Guardian endorsement statements.
Proposition 5 Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act of 2008
This proposition revamps the previously approved Proposition 36 that sends certain drug offenses to treatment before jail. Proposition 5 would expand this program to youth offenders. It would also make possession of less than 28.5 grams of marijuana an infraction instead of a misdemeanor. I’m not even sure why the City would take a position on this one, but in my opinion this is a good proposition. Vote YES and tell the Council to change their position.
Proposition 7 Solar and Clean Energy Act of 2008
I agree with the City on this one and we should vote NO on this bogus measure. I support renewable energy, but this proposition is not the solution. The opponent list includes all the major green groups — Environmental Defense, the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, and the Union of Concerned Scientists — none of which were consulted before it was put on the ballot.
Proposition 9 Victim’s Bill of Rights Act of 2008
No, No, No. According to the Bay Guardian “prop 6 would send more people to jail; Prop. 9 would keep them there longer. Prop. 9 would accomplish this by making it much more difficult for prisoners to gain parole. But California already releases very few inmates serving long sentences for crimes like murder and manslaughter. Moreover, many of the other provisions of Prop. 9 have already been enacted, which would mean costly redundancies if the measure is approved.” Vote NO and tell the Council to change their position.
Proposition 11 Redistricting, Constitutional Amendment and Statute
How different is it to have politicians redraw the districts than having a citizen commission appointed by the politicians redraw the maps. It is especially problematic when the Republicans would get 5 seats and the Democrats would get 5 seats when we know that California is majority Democrat. Let’s be fair here. We need help in this area, but this proposition is not the answer. This one is easy, vote NO an tell the Council to change their position.
As you can see, I only agree with one of the positions put forth by the City.
What do you think? I hope others will chime in and perhaps we can get another post started covering the other eight propositions not mentioned here.
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
What about Proposition 2??
It’s more important than all the others put together!!
I received an email from City Manager Jere Kershner regarding my question on “why these propositions?” The positions come from the recommendation by the League of California Cities Board of Directors
The Humane Farming web site has a list of Cities, Mayors, Council Members and other Public Officials that endorse Proposition #2.
The goal of the California Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act — Proposition 2 on the state’s November ballot — sounds extremely modest. It would ban the confinement of animals in a way that keeps them from being able to stand, sit, lie down, turn around and extend their limbs.
The fact that such fundamental decencies have to be forced upon factory farming says a lot about its horrors.
The New York Times has endorsed Prop #2. They urge California voters to pass Proposition 2 and urge every state to enact similar laws.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/opinion/09thu3.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
(The LA Times rational for not endorsing Prop #2 –after admitting that the way animals are confined on factory farms is extremely cruel– made no sense at all.)
PLEASE VOTE YES ON PROP 2!
The City Council is dead wrong on Prop 5 and Prop 9 (and its kindred Prop 6). Prop 5 continues the implementation of Prop 36, taking nonviolent drug offenders out of the prison and providing treatment. Props 6 and 9 increase the prison state, putting more people in prison and keeping them there longer. These are not the priorities of a majority of Ojai citizens.
If the city council is going to refuse to take a stand on issues of statewide and national importance that a majority of Ojai citizens support, like impeaching Bush and condemning the Iraq war, the least it can do is stay away from endorsing in the name of Ojai citizens propositions that are outside the purview of local government and contrary to what the majority of Ojai citizens believe.
What do they think they are doing?
I feel pretty strongly about defeating 8:
http://www.ojaipost.com/2008/08/hospital_ceo_comes_outagainst.shtml
what happened last night?
California League of Conservation Voters, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Union of Concerned Scientists + PG&E = Deregulation crisis and Blackouts of 2001.
I wouldn’t trust this alliance even if I were paid to. hahah oops no pun intended since all of these groups take money from So Cal Edison and PG&E. And PG&E and Edison are spending 28 million dolars to defeat the measure.
And to call it bogus? Why because you won’t take the time to read it yourself and so you trust other people to tell you how to think? Wow, now that’s bogus.
YES ON 7
“Bogus” is not the correct word for Prop 7. NECESSARY is a much better description. The state legislature has failed to take significant action regarding renewables and climate change on their own so now the people have to do it themselves.
The fact is the investor owned utilities aren’t ready to give up their stranglehold on energy production in the state and Prop 7 welcomes smaller providers to the table. Something they dread.
YES ON 7!!!!
Unconvincing. What is the problem with Proposition 7? It has an all-star line up of environmentalist groups against it? Is there a real reason for their opposition or is just the list of names alone supposed to win over voters? Don’t worry, I did the homework to see why they oppose it and learned they didn’t do their homework! tsk tsk, citing false claims and spreading misinformation. What a shame. I don’t trust what any group advocates when they receive money from a corporation, not at least until they really prove it in no way influences their decision. So far, they have done quite the contrary. YES ON 7.
Came home to find the neighbors put up a YES ON 8 yard sign. It’s frickin’ on! Googling now on where/how to get a NO ON 8 yard sign. Tit for tat. Can’t wait till 11/5.
To those who disagree with my posting opposition to Prop. 7, I appreciate your comments and effort. Perhaps “bogus” was not the right term to use – can we try “complicated” instead?
It is true that we should not vote simply based on who endorses/opposes a particular measure. However, at some point we may need to trust other authorities given a busy schedule and a complicated 25-page proposition. From experience, I generally agree with some of those opposed to Prop 7 (NRDC, Sierra Club). Further, after living in San Francisco for 9-years I know how much the Bay Guardian hates PG&E – for several years an issue did not go by where they didn’t bash on the company. For them to come out on the same side as PG&E is astounding. I trust the Bay Guardian and we have voted on the same side for many years.
With that said, the proposition calls for solar and clean energy zones, primarily in the desert, that could be miles and miles large. Secondly, the construction permits would be fast-tracked with a comment period as short as 100 days. I’m not sure I want to wager large-scale solar farms in the desert without some significant oversight.
Obviously, it is not a clear-cut measure and you should read the proposition (25-pages) and the legislative analyist statement to make your own decision. At this time, I am going to vote against it, but will remain open minded to changing.
For the record, those opposed include:
* The California Democratic Party
* The California Republican Party
* The California Labor Federation
* The California Taxpayers’ Association
* The League of California Cities
* The California Solar Energy Industries Association
* The Sierra Club of California
* The California League of Conservation Voters
* The Natural Resources Defense Council
* The Union of Concerned Scientists
* PG&E
* Edison
* Sempra
Strange bedfellows indeed.
Take a look at the Friday New York Times editorial page:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/opinion/10fri2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Propositions 6 and 9 are so misguided that they invite ridicule from the nation’s paper of record.
Why again are our city councilmembers endorsing these propositions, which surely a majority of Ojaians do not and should not support?
Kenley, you might do a service by printing a copy of the NYT editorial and circulating it among the councilmembers Tuesday.
Here’s a matching grant program for No On 8 up to $1 million through Sunday:
https://www.kintera.org/site/c.krLRKXPBLqF/b.4668471/apps/ka/sd/donor.asp
I have a short story to tell. I am a straight woman with a child, who is deeply spiritual and committed to the most honorable way of life possible. With that in mind, here is the story:
I once lived between two families in a family neighborhood; On one side was a a gay couple who had been together 26 years, had always been faithful and committed, had been subjected to hate crimes off and on, but handled it with forgiveness and grace and dignity. When a neighbor’s house burned down, they were the first to go and supply blankets, food and comfort to the family, and put on a fundraiser to help them get back on their feet.
On the other side of me was a “traditional” family with children, who attended church every Sunday. And at least once a week the husband slept with his secretary, drank too much and came home and beat up his wife. And when that house burned down, they figured it was their tax dollars that would help those people, they didn’t need to lift a finger.
Which couple would I rather teach my child about community, forgiveness, faithfulness, integrity and spirit? Which family is living a better example for my children?
Being able to, and wanting to, breed and reproduce with someone of a different gender, does not automatically qualify anyone to be better suited for marriage.
When I see the “Yes on 8” banners around town, I realize that there are still people who believe that bigotry is acceptable. This reminds me of the times in history when women couldn’t vote, and blacks had to use a different bathroom. It’s sad, shocking and horrifying that there would be people so backwards, so hateful, to such a movement to create a class of second class citizens.
On another note, it’s also sad when people who aren’t even invited to the wedding, make such a big deal about who is in the wedding. Honestly, you weren’t invited, so if you aren’t paying for the wedding or planning to buy a gift, it’s none of your business. Just don’t go! You probably don’t know everyone who’s getting married this weekend anyway!
I will not teach my child bigotry, prejudice or hate. Those are not Christian values, they are not qualities I want to see in anyone, and it saddens me to see those who call themselves Christian, go to church each week and spout off about “family values,” actually showing their children the opposite by their actions of intolerance and prejudice. Last time I checked, Jesus was about love and tolerance, do you think he would have supported such bigotry and hate? I doubt it.
Helping to move this back onto the home page, at least in the comments area, so you can find this commentary more easily.
i62mh7hdbgfkx2z1